Michael J. Haworth: Setting it straight

I’ve never minded a heathy back and forth on critical issues. It’s what make the world go round. But when I’m misquoted, as David Wolins does in his letter, “Orcem argument faulty” (Nov. 21), it makes me wonder just who I’m dealing with.

If we can’t debate using the facts, it’s a waste of time, for both of us, really. Mr. Wolins quoted me thusly, “410 truck trips per month.” In fact I wrote, “418 truck trips per day,” a significant difference. He is correct when he states the latest revision of the project description indicates an increase of Orcem trucks to 189 per day. VMT’s trucks remain stable at 87 per day, for a total of 552 truck trips per day. This information is dated Oct. 20. In any case, my numbers came from the description dated well before that. Mr. Wolins takes issue with my considering the additional, now 552 truck trips, “inconsequential” — his word, not mine — but it’ll do in this case. Adding these trips to the 20,000 plus (by my personal count) vehicles, using the Lemon Street/Sonoma Boulevard intersection daily is absolutely inconsequential.

Mr. Wolins’ hope for a “gotcha” moment regarding Orcem Americas President Steve Bryan’s proclamation at a city council meeting that they would be doing business with Syar Concrete, “one of his largest customers,” fizzled like a wet roman candle. He was hoping for more potential street damage as a pathway to the project’s rejection. However, Mr. Bryan emailed me that Orcem will make only four trips per week to the Syar plant on Lake Herman Road. He still considers them to be a “great customer.” Mr. Wolins incorrectly identifies Napa as one of Syar’s eight locations. It isn’t. Perhaps he was thinking of the Cemex Napa Concrete Pipe Plant. In any case, the three routes considered are Lemon Street to Interstate 80 East, to either Georgia Street or Tennessee Street to Columbus Parkway, or I-80 directly to Columbus Parkway then to Lake Herman Road. The first two routes are shorter, but the third is quicker. However, four trucks per week — no “gotcha” there. Nice try, though.

As for paying for the road damage done by the project’s trucks, can we please leave Sonoma Boulevard out of the equation? It’s also State Route 29 and the responsibility of Caltrans, not Vallejo. I know it pumps up the argument, but continuing to use it damages one’s credibility. And please, while throwing numbers around, “Vallejo has a backlog of road maintenance of more than $160 million,” in order to take them seriously, it’d help to quote documentation or at least a source. I harken back to Mr. Wolins’ outlandish “one truck that would do the damage of 6,900 cars” as an example. I’ve checked with Vallejo’s street maintenance department and no one there will corroborate that number. But if correct, isn’t that all the more reason for additional income for the city? By the way, I don’t “believe” the Lemon Street annual maintenance cost is $69,414. It’s actually in the Calculation of Future Pavement Maintenance Costs from the VMT site to Curtola Parkway from Pavement Engineering Inc., dated Aug. 31 (documentation). And I didn’t “suggest” that the project will pay Vallejo $600,000 annually. That figure was provided by Mr. Bryan, a man whom I’ve trusted since we first met in my shop two years ago (source).

Mr. Wolins “looked elsewhere for useful information” and found “an independent economic analysis of the plant ...” How fortunate. Of course he didn’t name the analysis or who provided all the figures he’s based his opinion upon. I mean it could’ve been someone behind the counter at McDonald’s, so I’ll respectfully disregard most of them. But let’s assume the $8,000 annual property tax figure on the parcels in question is accurate. Don’t you think the City of Vallejo is more than a little tired of paying that fee, for 13 years now, on a dilapidated, abandoned flour mill?

Advertisement

I’ve listed the economic benefits to city, county and state before, and now might be a good time to remind all concerned. These annual figures are provided in the Fiscal and Economic Impact Study developed by economists at Field Guide Consulting. The first set of figures refers to year one groundbreaking and construction, the second set refers to the plant at full operation. All figures are rounded to the nearest thousand:

• Tax revenue state and local government: $886,000/$2,048,000.

• Total fiscal impact City of Vallejo: $151,000/$533,000.

• Total property tax receipts Solano County: $47,000/$599,000.

• Total value added to GDP within Solano County: $12,546,000/$21,717,000.

• Total output (reflects business earnings for the two projects, their suppliers, and businesses impacted by induced effects - the re-spending of earnings by employees): $29,660,000/$61,961,000.

I can’t confirm the accuracy of these figures, but unlike the numbers Mr. Wolins shares, I know they were compiled by professional economists. So, there’s that.